Discover Bloomberg historical news feeds by listing its public monthly news sitemaps. Use the index to find past news feeds beyond the rolling feed.
List Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps. Returns Bloomberg's public monthly news-sitemap index so callers can discover historical news feeds beyond the rolling latest feed.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states it returns an index of sitemaps, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose output format, pagination, or any potential rate limits. For a simple list tool, the description provides basic behavioral context but leaves some details unstated.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource. It efficiently conveys the purpose and the key differentiator without any fluff.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, so the description must indicate what is returned. It says 'returns Bloomberg's public monthly news-sitemap index', which tells the caller they get an index but not the format or structure. Given the simplicity of the tool, this is nearly complete; a slightly more detailed description of the return format would make it fully complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is complete (100% coverage). The description adds no parameter-specific information because none exist. With no parameters, the baseline of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to explain anything about inputs.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'Bloomberg monthly news sitemaps', and explicitly distinguishes this from the rolling latest feed by mentioning historical feeds. It is unambiguous and differentiates from sibling tools like bloomberg_news or bloomberg_headlines.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It explains the use case: to discover historical news feeds beyond the latest feed. This implies when to use it (when historical monthly data is needed) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools. Still, the context is clear and helpful.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.